Scientific Grant Writing – The Complete Pocket Guide

iMotions – Biometric Research, Simplied

Scientic

Grant Writing

The Complete Pocket Guide

Dr. Robert Atkinson, Associate Professor at Arizona State University

Dr. Cheryl Bracken, Professor at Cleveland State University

Dr. Shaun Owens, Assistant Professor, University of South Carolina

Dr. Roger Taylor, Assistant Professor at Oswego State University of New York

Dr. Holly Witteman, Assistant Professor at Université Laval, Quebec

We would like to thank

for providing valuable input during the preparation phase and

making this pocket guide happen.

Scientic Grant Writing

Why do researchers have to write grant applications?

In a perfect world, researchers have an unlimited amount of money to run their

studies, purchase top-notch soft- and hardware, pay respondents, participate in

conferences, and publish their results in high-impact journals.

The reality is something else. In the wake of significant budget cuts within the recent

years in a volatile economic climate, monetary resources of societies for research and

development (R&D) are not indefinite, requiring a competitive selection procedure

for scientific research projects. In 2014, the United States spent a total of $432 billion

on R&D projects (about 2.74% of their global domestic income), with research being

funded primarily by government grants, companies, and non-profit foundations.

According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), federal R&D money is distributed

in the following way:

Each day, you support each of those R&D sectors indirectly through the taxes you pay,

products and services you purchase from companies, and donations you make to

charities. Something as simple as buying an aspirin may help foot the bill for research

on Parkinson’s disease.

30% Industry funding

30% University funding

10% Federally funded

private contractors

30% Federal agencies

Scientic Grant Writing

Particularly projects with excellent merit and high probability to produce results in

due time will be the ones that receive funding. By contrast, other funding sources

exist that specifically kick-start more “risky” research projects, where outcomes are

not guaranteed but the potential gain for society could be tremendous.

How winning a grant can aect

your scientic career

Jacobs & Lefgren (2000) analyzed the impact of grants

awarded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on the

careers of grant recipients, and showed the following

striking effects:

>> Winning a postdoctoral research grant increases

your chances for publishing within the next five years

by 20%.

>> Winning a postdoctoral grant increases your chances

to publish one paper by 11% and five papers by 23%.

>> Winning a first-time grant will produce one or more

additional publications within the next five years.

>> Winning any NIH grant will on average get you

$252,000 more in NIH funding for the following six to

ten years.

Paying the bill, society expects all funded research projects to live up to the highest

scientific standards. Governmental and nongovernmental agencies, companies,

and foundations spend a significant amount of time and resources screening the

academic landscape for exactly those projects that are aligned with their standards,

philosophy, and vision.

Scientic Grant Writing

Winning grants is prestigious. It is also hard work. Failure is omnipresent, and good

coping strategies and your ability to deal with failure is certainly necessary to keep

going and move on. Good news is that, unlike research paper submissions which have

to be unique, grant applications allow you to work with templates and re-purposed

text, allowing you to focus the most important parts of a proposal: Your research idea

and its packaging.

>> Make writing

grant applications a smooth experience!

success

Only the best-in-class projects are funded - this is why winning grants is fundamental

for you and your team. Only funding makes your projects possible, enables you to

purchase soft- and hardware, run studies and simulations, pay your respondents,

attend conferences and visit other labs, and publish your results in peer-reviewed

journals. And of course, winning grants and running a successful lab makes your

unit attractive for Undergraduate and Graduate Students, Postdocs and potential

collaborators from neighboring units of your own or even other research institutions.

Besides the direct benefits of having the required monetary resources to get your

research done, writing successful applications also has quite beneficial “side effects”

on your academic career.

In this pocket guide you will find the

most important aspects when it comes

to grant writing, best practices for

content and style.

Let’s make sure that your next proposal

is a success.

What is a grant? ................................................................................. 9

THE BASICS ... and BEYOND

Funding sources ................................................................................. 10

Grant categories ................................................................................. 12

The grant lifecycle ................................................................................. 15

PLAN YOUR PROPOSAL

Submit your work to

peer-reviewed journals ................................................................................. 23

and evaluation criteria ................................................................................. 24

Develop a deadline ................................................................................. 26

Plan your proposal ................................................................................. 17

Phrase your idea ................................................................................. 17

Find the right funding program ................................................................................. 19

Carry out pilot studies ................................................................................. 22

Review process

What‘s inside?

HOW TO WRITE: STYLE AND LAYOUT

Obey the three C‘s ................................................................................. 39

Make it visually appealing ................................................................................. 40

Structure, structure, structure ................................................................................. 40

Avoid jargon ................................................................................. 41

Cite properly and with style ................................................................................. 42

Include gures and graphics ................................................................................. 43

WHAT TO WRITE: PROPOSAL ELEMENTS

Proposal elements ................................................................................. 31

First page (title page) ................................................................................. 32

Abstract (summery) ................................................................................. 33

Project description ................................................................................. 34

Research design and methods ................................................................................. 35

Budget and timeline ................................................................................ 35

Biosketch(es) ................................................................................ 36

The time after submission .................................................................................. 46

RESOURCES

.................................................................................. 48

OUTLOOK

THE BASICS

What is a grant?

Put simply, grants are non-repayable funds handed out by the government,

corporations or foundations to a recipient. In order to receive a grant, some form of

grant writing – often referred to as proposal or application – is required.

You can either submit proposals to a potential funder on your own initiative, or

respond to a call for proposal from the funder. Most grants fund a specific project or

equipment and require a certain level of compliance and reporting.

Generally, proposal requirements vary depending upon

the grant category

>> Stay in the loop and educate yourself

about the specific application requirements.

We will take a closer look at the different

forms of funding and types of grants in

the following sections.

the funding source

>> >>

inform

Funding sources

Government funding

Major government funding sources in USA include:

National Science Foundation (NSF)

NSF is an independent federal agency and supports fundamental research

and education in all the non-medical fields of science and engineering.

Typically, NSF grants go to individuals or small groups of investigators

who carry out research at their home campuses. Some grants further

provide funding for mid-scale research centers, instruments, and

facilities that serve researchers from many institutions. Still, others fund

national-scale facilities that are shared by the research community as a

whole.

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Being an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human

Services, NIH is the largest funder of biomedical research in the world,

and the primary agency of the United States government responsible

for health-related projects. Additionally to research conducted on-site,

NIH provides funding for extramural projects all across the US. A study

of Jacobs & Lefgren (2000) shows how winning an NIH grant positively

affects your research productivity.

Most national funding agencies in the US are located on the East Coast:

Funding sources

Funding through US military

The US military primarily funds research projects through the following agencies:

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

(DARPA)

DARPA is an agency of the U.S. Department of Defense responsible

for the development of emerging technologies for use by the military.

DARPA pursues strategic funding of innovative research proposals.

Office of Naval Research (ONR)

ONR sponsors research in core basic and applied research in new, high-

risk areas investigated by multidisciplinary and multi-departmental

teams. It funds topics that foster leading-edge science and attract new

principal investigators and organizations.

The Swartz Foundation

The strategic intent of the Swartz Foundation is to integrate problem-

solving approaches from physics, mathematics, electrical engineering,

and computer science into neuroscience research to better understand

the relationship between the human brain and mind.

The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation makes grants year-round to support

original research and broad-based education related to science,

technology, and economic performance.

Private grants are given by a foundation, corporation or nongovernmental agency.

Since private institutions are not buried under as much bureaucracy and red tape as

the federal government, private grants can be easier to get as compared to federal

grants. Examples in the human behavior research fields are:

Private grants

Grant categories

It is important to understand what can and what can‘t be funded on a particular call

for proposals. Basically, there are several different grant categories that differ in

their funding objectives and their scope of funding.

Get familiar with:

NIH Grants

The NIH R03 “Small Grant” category supports small research

projects that can be carried out in a short period of time with

limited resources. It provides funding for up to two years and up

to $50,000. This category is an excellent starting point for your

next pilot study, secondary data analysis or projects aiming at the

development of innovative research methodology/technology as

no preliminary data is required (but may be included if available).

The NIH R21 “Exploratory/Developmental Research” category

provides support for early and conceptual project stages. Project

funding of up to $275,000 is available for up to two years. Particularly

research proposals with a focus on exploratory studies breaking

new ground or extending previous discoveries are fostered. At the

same time, high-risk/high-reward studies are funded that may lead

to a breakthrough in a particular area or result in novel techniques,

agents, methodologies, models or applications that will impact

biomedical, behavioral or clinical research.

INSIDE SCOOP

Research Grants

are mostly used to support discrete, specified, circumscribed research

projects, typically lasting up to five years. This is NIH’s most commonly

used grant program, supporting the research of teams of scientists from

one or more universities. Grant funds must contribute to the direct costs

of the research for which the funds were awarded, and the benefits should

be directly attributable to the grant.

Grant categories

Resource/Equipment Grants

typically provide funding for specific devices and instruments (such as

biosensors and biomedical imaging devices like EEG, eye tracking or fNIRS

systems) including software that is too expensive to be obtained through

a research project grant. The purchase is typically not bound to one single

project, but can be shared among several groups or scientific programs.

Often, these grants cover the direct costs of the instruments, while the

host institution must meet costs for maintenance, service contracts, and

technical support. An example for an equipment grant is NIH’s Shared

Instrumentation Grant Program.

Career Development Grants

are excellent ways to fund your project at any career stage. Particularly

early-stage investigators (such as PhD students or postdocs) can gain

significant momentum with funding for an intensive, supervised career

development experience in the biomedical, behavioral or clinical sciences

leading to research independence. Funding is provided to junior faculty

members who exemplify the role of teacher-scholars through outstanding

research, excellent education, and the integration of education and

research within the context of the mission of their organizations. Such

activities should build a firm foundation for a lifetime of leadership in

integrating education and research. Examples for this type of grant are

the NSF Faculty Early Career Development Program, or NIH’s various

Research Career Development Awards (such as K01, or K99 “Pathway to

Independence” Award).

Education Grants

target at supporting low-income academically talented students who are

pursuing associate, baccalaureate or graduate degrees. With this grant

type, the education of future scientists, engineers, and technicians is

supposed to be secured by curricular and co-curricular activities affecting

students’ academic advancement. For a representative example, visit NSF’s

Undergraduate Education Program.

Grant categories

Grants vs. fellowships

>> In general, grants and fellowships do not need

to be repaid. While oftentimes the terms are used

interchangeably, there is one major distinction you

should be aware of:

Grants are tpyically paid to your research institution

which then distributes the money to you and your team.

Fellowships usually refer to funding in support of single

researchers (most likely PhD students or postdocs). In

this case, the money is directly paid to the awardee and

is provided for a limited period of time (comparable to

a contract).

Travel Grants

provide funding for student and re-/postgraduate researchers in order

to attend scientific congresses and conferences or to visit internationally

recognized research institutions to collect data and meet experts to discuss

preliminary results. While not that common for government funding

sources, private foundations typically provide a wide variety of travel grant

opportunities.

The grant lifecycle

Independent of the funding source and grant category you apply for, a typical grant

lifecycle comprises several common elements (or stages).

On your part it will include thorough planning, the writing of the proposal, and the

submission of your grant application (along with some jittering whether your project

will be funded).

To help you gain a competitive edge and prepare the best way possible,

we will get to each of them in the following sections.

Prepare your proposal

(6-12 months)

>> Find the right program for you and your idea

>> Become a “student” of the RFA

>> Develop a timeline for proposal preparation

>> Understand criteria used to evaluate proposals

>> Understand the review process and reviewers

Write your proposal

(1-3 months)

>> Write the proposal clearly and logically

>> Prepare budget with a strong justification

>> Obtain critical input from experienced colleagues

Submit your proposal

and await award notification

(up to 10 months)

>> Track application and await funding decision

>> Start your project and report results

PLAN YOUR

PROPOSAL

Plan your proposal

Putting together your proposal can easily take 12 months (or even longer), so planning

ahead is certainly key. Keep a keen eye on the horizon, steering safely but steadily

towards accomplishing all necessary requirements of the application.

Frankly, there is nothing more stressful than realizing that you are preparing for

a funding scheme that doesn‘t really support the idea of your project, or noticing

that you have left out core aspects in your research question and missed to contact

relevant stakeholders.

Phrase your idea

Excellent research starts with an innovative and transformative idea.

The best research questions are breaking new ground – they address

something that has not been answered before and siginficantly

contribute to science. You want to push beyond the limits of the known,

and this requires your ideas to be anchored in the framework of existing

theories and hypotheses. Allow your idea to reference the existing

state of knowledge – pick up the threads that were dropped by already

existing studies in the field. Be sure you are up-to-date on techniques and

technology, literature, and interpretations of ideas or theories (Kraicer,

2015).

Checklist: Shape your idea

>> Hypothesis:

Is the hypothesis clear, concise, and testable?

>> Focus on aims:

Are outcomes and implications clear?

>> Questions:

Are there questions that need to be addressed?

>> Experimental Design:

Can you specify and design experiments that will allow

you to test your hypothesis?

Where to find inspiration?

Google Scholar is an excellent starting point for keyword search. Access

Google Scholar from within the university network to download papers

directly from the publishers’ websites using the subscription of your

institution. Scholar also lists referencing papers, allowing you to follow

the development of new ideas and research strands based on an original

publication.

Microsoft Academic is similar to Google Scholar, allowing you to search for

academic papers and publications.

Loop by Frontiers is the first research network integrating all journals and

academic websites, making researchers discoverable across the boundaries

of publishers and organizations. This is an excellent resource if you would

like to examine the activity of researchers and teams at a certain location or

in a specific research field.

ResearchGate connects researchers across the globe, making it easy for

you to share and access scientific output, knowledge, and expertise. On

ResearchGate you can certainly find inspiration, phrase scientific questions

and project ideas to the community, or contact researchers directly.

LinkedIn offers excellent tools to follow the activity of grant agencies as well

as fellow researchers or groups with a dedicated focus on your scientific

field of interest.

INSIDE SCOOP

Phrase your idea

Particularly when funding levels are low (as they currently are), uninspired

“copy-paste” science or projects that are too speculative and off-ground

most certainly won‘t be funded (Bourne & Chalupa, 2006).

Be passionate about your ideas. If you are not thrilled about your work or

feel in doubt, it’s probably not a good idea to go for a grant at this stage.

Find the right funding program

It is always a wise decision to stick to realistic goals - pursue ideas that

you can actually accomplish in reasonable time and with predictable

budget. Solving global diseases might sound like an excellent long-term

research endeavor, however it might be hard to accomplish with the help

of existing funding schemes.

To be on the safe side, break the global idea into smaller units and

compartmentalize it into achievable milestones. The more realistic your

idea is, the more likely it will get funded.

Consider this phase as an opportunity

to have an impact. It is your chance

to communicate your ideas to peers

and mentors. Phrase your research

questions theoretically first, and

specify over time. The more concrete

your ideas are stated, the easier it will

be to measure and analyze their effects

while at the same time controlling for

unwanted side effects.

Find the right funding program

All funding agencies have websites where you can get an overview of all

ongoing funding schemes and strands and find suitable programs.

Here is how it goes: Typically, funding programs are announced online in

the form of a Program Announcement (PA) or Request for Application (RFA).

These documents describe the area of interest for the agency along with

general guidelines for conducting the research. If your project idea does

not fit a particular program, save your time and resources. Instead, apply

elsewhere to guarantee a programmatic fit between your idea and the

desired outcomes of the grant agency.

Great ideas need wings …

and landing gear.

(C.D. Jackson, 1902 - 1964)

Find the right funding program

>> Funding agencies want to give away money and are happy to help with

questions you might have. Don‘t hesitate and contact their staff whenever

you would like to get detailed information about a specific program that‘s

not fully addressed on their website.

Now how can you determine whether the program fits you?

Study the Request for Application (RFA). Understand the

directions outlined in the RFA, the key components, goals, and

areas of emphasis. Build your proposal on these elements.

Check previously funded projects. Find and carefully read

abstracts of previously funded projects. They are a great source

of information. You can search NSF-funded projects on the NSF

website, for example.

Contact colleagues and supervisors who received funding

from a certain source. If your advisor or PI have successfully

applied for a specific grant when they were in your current

position, it certainly is helpful to ask for their opinion on which

funding scheme might be the best fit for you. They can also put

you in touch with their collaborators (in different departments or

universities), spreading the word about your project and assisting

you in localizing the most suitable application target.

Participate in university trainings. Your university might host

dedicated training courses and information sessions on funding

schemes as offered by the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs, for

example.

Call the Program Manager at the funding agency. Commonly,

each program has a Program Officer (also referred to as Program

Official or Program Administrator) who manages grant portfolios.

Present your idea to them and discuss the fit with the program

priorities. Usually, Program Officers are scientists themselves,

understanding your situation and being able to point you to local

resources at your university.

Find the right funding program

These websites offer meta-searches

across several funding agencies and schemes:

Newton’s List provides an interactive forum for funders and grant-seekers.

The site is a free resource open to individuals searching for international

funding and organizations looking to market their grants to an international

audience. Newton’s list is co-sponsored by NSF, providing information on

current international funding opportunities for students and researchers

working in natural and social science fields.

Grants.gov lists all current discretionary funding opportunities from 26

agencies of the United States government, including the National Institutes

of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy,

and many others - in other words, all the most important public funders

of research in the United States. Grants.gov is free and does not require a

subscription.

The MIT Office of Sponsored Programs is also an excellent source to browse

national funding opportunities.

The NSF Office of Extramural Research features a primary and an advanced

search page, where you can search using a wide variety of advanced search

criteria.

NSF offers a free search for all NSF funding programs. The NSF website does

not require any subscription.

Grant Resource Center (GRC). The American Association of State Colleges

and Universities (AASCU) offers a database customized to smaller institutions

and staff assistance. A paid institutional membership is required for access.

GrantForward by the Illinois Research Information Service is monitoring grant

opportunities of over 9,000 sponsors. The service is free for the University of

Illinois (UI) community. Outside the UI system, a paid institutional subscription

of $19 is needed for access.

INSIDE SCOOP

Carry out pilot studies

Running a pilot study with a small set of respondents is an excellent way

to generate preliminary data that can be included in your proposal.

This allows you to not only get a feeling for whether or not your idea

works (you might need to revise the experimental protocol), but also

shows reviewers that your experimental approaches are solid and sound.

This is particularly relevant for new applications where piloting data can

serve as general proof of concept for your proposed project.

In case your pilot project and proposal involve human respondents, it is

mandatory to contact the Institutional Review Board (IRB) / Independent

Ethics Committee (IEC) at your institution as they will need to review and

approve any of your experiments.

Why pilot studies?

Pilot studies are necessary for a successful application

in several ways:

>> Run pilots to identify any issues and potential

problems beforehand.

>> Run pilots to exclude factors and parameters that

you did not consider before. Use the results to fine-

tune your proposal.

>> Run pilots to show reviewers that you have the

expertise to design studies as well as to collect,

analyze, and interpret data.

Submit your work to peer-reviewed journals

Most likely, you will apply for grants after having spent some time at

the lab, helping others doing their research, and collecting pilot data for

yourself.

As your scientific publication record is a crucial assessment criterion, it

is definitely recommend in preparation of a grant proposal to write up

your recent work and submit it to peer-reviewed journals to be able to

cite your research in your application as submitted, in press (accepted),

or published (do not include any of your work that is still in preparation).

Publish or Perish

>> Anne-Wil Harzing, Professor of International Management at Middlesex

University (London), is providing the free software Publish or Perish, which

retrieves and analyzes academic citations for their impact. It has been

designed to help you present evidence of the impact of your academic

research. Definitely have a look at it!

INSIDE SCOOP

Understand review

and evaluation criteria

First Review

Your proposal is initially screened by the Program Officer, who accomplishes

a complete non-technical review. Are all required documents attached? Are

all requirements met? Are there any mistakes in spelling, grammar, and style?

Also, the Program Officer screens the proposal for keywords. If the agency

is funding projects on “immersive learning” in “virtual reality”, however your

proposal is lacking these two keywords, it is rather unlikely that your application

will make it to the second round.

Second Review

In the second phase, your proposal is evaluated technically by a panel of

independent experts (in military funding agencies the review is often done by

the Program Officers themselves). Their independent evaluations are based on

the criteria listed in the Request for Application (RFA) and eventually aggregated

into a single score.

Third Review

The Program Officer determines which projects can be funded within the

given budget. If there’s two competing proposals, the project with the smaller

funding request might be favored in order to prevent the overall budget from

spilling over.

Understand review and evaluation criteria

Evaluation criteria

Most likely, your proposal will be evaluated

based on the following aspects:

>> Intellectual merit. Has your project the potential to advance knowledge

within its own field?

>> Broader impacts. Has your project the potential to benefit across other

fields and contribute to the achievement of outcomes with respect to human

resources in general?

>> Creativity. To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore

creative, original or potentially transformative concepts?

>> Organization. Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-

reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan

incorporate a mechanism to assess success?

>> Expertise. How well are you qualified to conduct the proposed activities?

>> Resources. Are there adequate resources available (either at the home

organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities.

INSIDE SCOOP

>> Make sure you understand program and evaluation criteria.

know

Develop a timeline

Develop a timeline that helps you stay on track and allows you to wrap up your proposal

in due time. Definitely factor in time buffers and give yourself the appropriate lead

time. Keep in mind that piloting and pretesting require additional time resources.

If you rush the preparation of the proposal, it will show (and the reviewers will notice).

Kraicer (2015) and Vilis (1995) recommend to stick to the following timeline and

milestone plan:

MONTHS

Kick your mental gears and start thinking.

Brainstorm interesting projects that are in the tradition of

existing theories and findings while at the same time being

innovative:

Always keep your scientific track record in mind as it is one

of the most important elements of your proposal. Finish your

ongoing experiments as soon as possible, write up papers, and

submit them for publication.

>> Crawl online resources and start reviewing literature.

>> Touch base with colleagues and mentors to discuss

project ideas and possible issues.

Keep in mind:

Peer-review of submitted papers can easily take six

months or more (dependent on potential revision).

What grant reviewers evaluate most is your scientific impact,

generally represented by the number of published papers in

peer-reviewed journals.

before the deadline

Develop a timeline

Draft and initial version of the main proposal section. Be

aware that this can take four weeks of very intense work.

Block this time off well in advance, and do not schedule

anything else.

>> The main proposal section might be best tackled in one

continuous block of time. Plan in up to six hours per

day each day of the week. You will not get it done in

time if you only work a few hours a week on it.

MONTHS

before the deadline

Run a pilot study to collect preliminary data:

>> Preliminary results will boost the likelihood of the

proposal being funded.

>> Reviewers are critical and might consider a hundred

reasons why one of your proposed ideas will not work.

Any of these can be prevented if you can show that you

have already taken care of them.

>> Small grants are excellent ways to demonstrate that

you already received funding. They will enhance the

success rate of your proposal.

MONTHS

before the deadline

MONTHS

before the deadline

Obtain feedback from your colleagues.

>> Scientific colleagues who can serve as subject matter

experts and are similar to your reviewers are

particularly valuable.

Develop a timeline

>> Hand your proposal to someone who is an expert

editor, spotting spelling and grammar mistakes,

wording and phrasing issues on the fly.

>> Take the time to sit down with them and discuss any

and all issues and flaws. Pay attention to what they

did not understand. Revise and follow up.

>> Give yourself the time to look at the proposal

again with a fresh eye. Twist and tweak, let

your proposal incubate and improve.

MONTHS

before the deadline

(earlier at some institutions)

Submit your proposed experiments to the Institutional

Review Board (IRB) / Independent Ethics Committee (IEC) for

approval.

MONTHS

before the deadline

Grab your proposal and read again the guidelines.

Carefully check the instructions. Work on other parts:

>> Get equipment quotations - hardware and sensors,

software, other devices.

>> Get letters of confirmation from collaborators.

>> Get the budget finalized.

Develop a timeline

Generate the final version. Do a thorough proof-reading,

and also hand it to someone who has not seen it before

(you might have gone blind for typos and spelling errors).

Do not trust the spell checker.

Be sure to check formatting requirements (some agencies

require .doc while others request .pdf).

WEEKS

before the deadline

WEEK

before the deadline

Get all required signatures. Assemble all required copies.

Keep in mind that the copy machine might be occupied or

defective.

Submit the proposal electronically

or by express mail/courier.

Get some rest (and coffee).

DAYS

before the deadline

Put together what appears to you as the final version of the

proposal, including figures and references as well as official

forms. Hand it to colleagues for final review.

MONTHS

before the deadline

PROPOSAL

ELEMENTS

What to write:

Proposal elements

Often, the difference between success and failure lies not only in the quality of the

science behind your idea, but also in the quality of the proposal itself. Simply put: To

make a lasting impression, your idea needs a nice, well-crafted wrapping.

Good writing will not save ideas, but

bad writing will kill good ones.

(J, Kraicer, 2015; p.1)

Start with a good idea - then improve

the packaging

>> Often, good ideas are not funded because they

are not packaged well.

>> For every good idea that is funded there are others

that are not, simply because they are not packaged

well.

>> Poor ideas will not be successful regardless of how

well they are packaged.

When you compare grant applications and scientific papers, you will notice that

successful proposals share the following characteristics:

>> The writing is more energetic, positive, direct, and concise.

>> Sentences are shorter, key phrases, and elements are highlighted.

>> The subject matter is easy to understand, with fewer highly technical terms.

>> Figures and tables are placed consciously.

What to write: Proposal elements

First page (title page)

Fill in the cover page completely and accurately (up to 10% of all

applications have something missing from this page):

1 First page (title page)

2 Abstract (summary)

3 Project description

4 Budget information

5 Biosketch(es)

What goes into a proposal?

>> Obtain all signatures.

>> Use a distinct, descriptive, and appropriate title for your project.

Use a two-part title as it can easily be repurposed across

applications, for example:

part 1: “Multisensory data collection in immersive learning

environments” (general).

part 2: “Effects of cognitive load on facial expressions and EEG

theta frequency power in classroom student populations” (more

specific, more targeted towards the Program Announcement).

QUICK TIPS

An excellent grant proposal is well-prepared, thoughtfully planned, and concisely

packaged. Typically, grant proposals contain the following elements:

The following pages will take a closer look at the main purpose and characteristics of

each proposal element and provide quick tips that will help you master the individual

sections.

What to write: Proposal elements

Abstract (summary)

The project abstract is the most important section of your proposal as it

typically is the only section that every reviewer reads. It is supposed to

describe your project as concisely, accurately, and logically as possible,

mostly limited to a single page. Make sure that the abstract is not just

a simple summary of the proposal but stands on its own and can be

understood even if separated from the rest of the application.

>> Take the summary seriously.

Write it last.

>> It is the first part that is read by the Program Officer. It sets the

first impression and determines who will review it.

Remember that it will be read both by experts who know your

research field and by those who don‘t

>> Include hypotheses, objectives, procedures, research plan,

timeline, and significance.

>> State long-term objectives and concrete aims (+ hypotheses).

>> Connect your proposal to the Program Announcement (PA) and

Request for Application (RFA).

>> Present why your proposal is unique, relevant, significant, and

why it needs to be supported.

QUICK TIPS

What to write: Proposal elements

Project description

The project description contains the following elements:

Background and significance. Focus on the three questions:

1 What is known?

2 What is unknown?

3 Why is it essential to find out?

Critically evaluate existing studies and be aware that your

reviewers might have contributed significantly to the existing

state of knowledge. Link your current project to the missing

aspects of previous research and make clear how your project

will result in an advancement of the field.

Specific aims & intellectual merit. Explain how and why your

current project has the potential to advance knowledge in your

specific field. Phrase the intellectual merit in an impersonal and

objective way, sequentially and logically. Do not include any first

person references or value judgments about the merits of your

work – that is for the reviewers to decide.

Broader impact. Address in this section the broader impact

of your research on neighboring fields, science and technology

in general, the overall well-being of individuals and society or

relationships between academia, industry, and others.

Pilot & preliminary data. Show preliminary/pilot data to

document your credibility and research experience. Pilot data

helps reviewers understand that you considered side effects and

hidden factors.

Hypothesis and long-term objectives. Phrase hypotheses that

can be quantified and tested. Explain how your current question

has impact on long-term objectives. Why is your research

significant and relevant?

What to write: Proposal elements

Research design and methods. Describe how you want to test

the hypotheses and how you will fulfill the specific aims. Outline

the research method and design to accomplish each aim and

explain the rationale. Describe data collection, analysis, and

interpretation. If you apply novel techniques, explain why they

are superior to existing methods.

Budget & timeline

Inexperienced writers typically propose too much and misestimate time

and monetary limitations.

Always make sure to prepare a budget with strong justifications,

avoiding reviewers’ impression that your project is overly ambitious or

lacks focus. Make use of a project timeline and explicitly list the amount

of time you and your colleagues will spend carrying out each portion of

the project. Remember to align your budget with the agency’s guidelines

in the Program Announcement (PA) / Request for Application (RFA) – your

proposal will be judged on the degree of reasonableness.

Mention and document how your home institution will assist you

in running the project (for example, providing resources that are not

directly covered by the funding scheme).

>> Make sure to explain thoroughly how you plan to collect and analyze the data.

explain

What to write: Proposal elements

Biosketch(es)

In this section, biosketches of all project members are listed (typically

one page per person), including their contact details, current and

previous positions as well as a list of their publications and contributions

to science that are considered crucial for the current proposal.

The biosketch section is supposed to highlight your and your colleagues’

expertise and skills in the field. Sometimes personal statements can be

added, allowing you to describe your professional and academic profile

in more detail. Most likely, you can repurpose this section across several

grant applications.

STYLE AND

LAYOUT

How to write:

Style and layout

There’s a couple of simple tricks that can boost the readability of your proposal,

making it much easier and fun to read for eviewers. If you present your ideas in an

overly complicated way, they might lose track and skip core aspects of your proposal

(Bourne & Chalupa, 2006).

Remember: Your reviewers are your strongest advocates. Provide them with the best

reading experience possible.

Reviewers are people, too.

>> Reviewers are people like you and me - they might do

their review task over and above their daily mandated

activities, on evenings, weekends, holidays or when

commuting back home. They might wait until the last

minute to begin their review and or accomplish it in bits

and pieces.

You certainly want the reviewers to be your enthusiastic

champions. Make sure to refer to RFA requirements

clearly. Logically prepare and well structure your

proposal to make the reviewers‘ lives a bit easier (and

yours) - after all, if you make them think too hard to

grasp your idea, your chances of getting funded move

towards zero.

The next pages describe which guidelines you should follow in order to improve the

readability of your proposal and gain the reviewers‘ interest and approval.

Obey the three C‘s - concise, clear, and complete

Write the proposal logically and clearly. Keep in mind that you will always

have less space than you would want, so explain your project exhaustively,

yet as brief as possible. Make sure to describe all central aspects of your

project, but do not fill the maximum page count if you can communicate

the rationale of your research within fewer pages.

How to write: Style and layout

Specify the scope up-front and build an architecture that always routes

back. How is your central idea reflected in the theoretic introduction? How

does it affect your experimental paradigm or your budget? Breadcrumbs

that all link back to your core proposition will help reviewers immensely as

they show your strength in binding all together.

>> You forget to explain why your

project is needed, and what the specific aims or objectives are to

test your hypothesis.

>> You do not describe potential outcomes, conclusions,

and implications.

>> You do not properly describe the background of the field, leaving

out core references and publications.

>> You do not describe your own preliminary/pilot data, proposed

sample sizes or statistical tests.

>> You use the catch-phrases cutting-edge and innovative

throughout, without stating hypotheses, experimental designs,

budgets, and goals.

>> Your proposal is not aligned with the funding agency’s Program

Announcement (PA)/Request for Application (RFA), or contains

copy-pasted text from other proposals without adapting passages

and key words to the current funding scheme.

>> Your proposal contains mistakes in spelling, grammar, and style.

COMMON MISTAKES

How to write: Style and layout

Make it visually appealing

Use line spacing between paragraphs and set margins to 0.8 or 0.9 inch.

Keep paragraphs in a reasonable length and try to use four or more

paragraphs per page. Provide white space generously (also to the right

and left), avoid dense text blocks and text wrapping. Obey to standards

expected by the agencies – for example, NIH highlights their format

requirements on their Write Your Application website.

>> You use several type styles conjunctively. Your paragraphs

contain sentences that are bold-faced, ALL-CAPITALIZED, italic

and underlined.

>> You write in 9-point Times New Roman, single-spaced without

spaces between paragraphs, headings, or subheadings.

COMMON MISTAKES

Structure, structure, structure

Make use of subheadings and a numbering system that ties it all together.

Use bold only for subheadings, or for the most important topic sentences.

Start each section with a summary of the key points. Remember: Reviewers

might not read your proposal in one piece, and often parallel to other

applications (and their own work) - any guidance that you offer them will

be appreciated as they can skip back and forth without losing focus on the

relevant information.

>> You do not use any subheadings.

>> You use subheadings inconsistently. For example, you start off

by listing goals I, II, and III, but then label your experiments (a)

through (h) without any obvious relationship to the goals.

COMMON MISTAKES

How to write: Style and layout

Avoid jargon

Reviewers might come from other research fields, so don’t rely on

unexplained jargon. According to Henson (2004), scientists want their

work to appear scholarly, so they habitually inflate their prose with large

words and complicated sentences to achieve the effect of serious thinking.

However, such tactics can have the opposite effect on readers.

>> You use lots of acronyms, and define them several pages after

you first use them (or do not explain them at all).

>> You use lots of jargon. Instead of use you write utilize, instead

of method you say methodological technique, making it hard

for reviewers from other fields to grasp your idea quickly.

COMMON MISTAKES

>> Don‘t be poetic. Keep your wording

short, crisp, and clear.

clear

How to write: Style and layout

Cite with style

When formulating the motivation for your proposed project, make sure

to cite all relevant work. As stated by Bourne & Chalupa (2006), your

reviewers might be experts in your field, so not citing their work at all or

citing them not appropriately will give them the impression that you did

not do your homework. Therefore, make sure to reference your current

ideas to existing research theories and findings.

Additionally to listing references in your text, you certainly want to cite

them correctly and according to established standards. Citation standards

define the format of references in the continuous text as well as in the

bibliography/list of references. Be aware, though: Unlike a research paper,

you may be limited to the number of citations in your grant application -

choose wisely and pick those that are well known or support your work.

American Psychological Association (APA)

This style is most commonly used within the social sciences.

The complete APA publication manual can be downloaded

from their website.

Text: Data was collected using iMotions Biometric

Research Platform (2016).

Reference: iMotions Biometric Research Platform (version

6.1) [Computer software]. (2016). Copenhagen, Denmark:

iMotions A/S.

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

The IEEE citation reference can be downloaded from their

website.

Text: Data was collected using [1].

Reference: [1] iMotions Biometric Research Platform

version 6.1. Copenhagen, Denmark: iMotions A/S,

2016.

How to write: Style and layout

Automate the formatting of your

literature database.

Different grant applications require different reference formatting. Of course

you can do all the editing manually. This. however, takes time and is prone

to errors.

Instead, make use of software for automatic, on-the-fly formatting of your

literature database in a consistent way, for example in Microsoft Word or

Apache OpenOffice.

The two most widely used ones are:

EndNote (Thomson Reuters) is a commercial reference management

software package, used to manage bibliographies and references when

writing essays and articles. EndNote offers a plugin for Word and OpenOffice,

and can import/export citation libraries, for example, from Google Scholar.

Also, EndNote can be used for literature search based on keywords.

Mendeley (Elsevier). Available for students and researchers, Mendeley is

a bibliography software maintaining your literature database. It allows

for online literature search and exports formatted citations into Word or

EndNote.

INSIDE SCOOP

Include graphics and figures

Captivating and engaging grant proposals not only use text, but also place

figures, images, and tables in order to convey preliminary/pilot results, your

background, and approach and thinking. Use figure legends consciously,

and highlight the significance of the figure for your proposal, for example,

by marking the significant effect that justifies the proposed project.

How to write: Style and layout

Figures and tables serve as visual aids for the reviewers to understand

your proposal as best as possible. Use graphs to delineate your long-term

objective and your specific aims as well as a timeline, your hypotheses,

and methods. Feel encouraged to include relevant decision trees, flow

charts examples, and pictures as they will subserve the overall impression

of structure and completeness.

Never copy-paste a figure from your own or other publications.

Figures should be customized to the grant application.

>> Add legends and scale bars.

>> Annotate figures and highlight key elements.

>> Scale text for readability.

>> Use colors for intuitive understanding.

>> Write a good caption.

QUICK TIPS

OUTLOOK

The time after submission

Once you have submitted your proposal, it is certainly not the time to just sit

around and wait. Remember that the review process can easily take six to twelve

months, with additional time passing until the funds are disbursed and you can get

started purchasing soft- and hardware, paying off your colleagues, and reimbursing

respondents. Ideally, you are notified that the reviewers were thrilled by your

application, and that funding begins at the designated start date. Congratulations!

In this case, you might want to check out NIH’s advice on how to manage your grant.

However, rejection is inevitable, even for applications with solid scientific background

and excellent packaging. Rejection does not mean that your ideas are not worth

funding. Instead, funding levels in the current round might have been too low to

support your proposal.

The main advice is to keep trying. Always check if a re-submission is possible –

slight changes might turn the tide. If possible, ask why the proposal was rejected:

Are other programs more suitable for resubmission? Was my budget appropriate?

Can I improve any of the scientific project sections? Address each of the emphasized

aspects with facts, and make it clear in the resubmission that you understand what

was wrong with the proposal in the first

place. Indicate exactly how you overcame

the issues, and why the updated version

is much improved.

Don‘t feel intimidated by the excessive

workload that flows into assembling all

the bits and pieces that make up your

proposal. Take one step at a time and ...

smile.

Everything is theoretically

impossible, until it‘s done.

(Robert A. Heinlein)

RESOURCES

Resources

Bourne, P. E., & Chalupa, L. M. (2006). Ten Simple Rules for Getting Grants. PLoS

Computational Biology, 2(2), e12.

Casella, P. (2007). Top 10 Things You can Do To Write and Effective Grant

Application. Online resource accessed on 2016-03-27.

Darley, J. M., Zanne, M. P., & Roediger H. L. (2004, 2nd). The Compleat Academic: A

Career Guide. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Grimpe, G. (2012). Extramural research grants and scientists’ funding strategies:

Beggars cannot be choosers? Research Policy 41 (8), 1448-1460

Henson, K. (2004). Grant writing in higher education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Horta, H., & Santos, J. M. (2016). The impact of publishing during PhD studies

on career research publication, visibility, and collaborations. Research in Higher

Education 57 (1), 28-50.

Howlett, S., & Bourque, R. (2011, 5th). Getting Funded: The complete guide to

writing grant proposals. Seattle, WA: Word & Raby Publishing (book resources

available online).

Jacob, B.A., & Lefgren, L. (2011). The Impact of NIH Postdoctoral Training Grants on

Scientific Productivity. Research Policy 40 (6), 864-874.

Kraicer, J. (2015). The Art of Grantsmanship. Strassbourg: Human Frontier Science

Program. Available online, downloaded on 2016-03-25.

Vilis, T. (1995). An example schedule for a graduate scholarship application. Online

resource accessed on 2016-03-27.

Learn more

imotions.com/blog/grant-writing/

North America

285 Summer Street, Suite 201

Boston, MA 02210

United States

Tel +1 617-520-4958

Europe

Frederiksberg Allé 1-3 Fl. 7

Copenhagen V, 1621

Denmark

Tel +45 71 998 098

Synchronize, Visualize and Analyze your research in Eye Tracking, Facial

Expression Analysis, Galvanic Skin Response, Surveys, EEG and much